>muh justice system isn't just
>muh boring shitty writing style
Tell me again why this rubbish is considered so highly?
>Nowhere in Kafka does there glimmer the aura of the infinite idea; nowhere does the horizon open. Each sentence is literal and each signifies. The two moments are not merged, as the symbol would have it, but yawn apart and out of the abyss between them blinds the glaring ray of fascination.
Google "Notes on Kafka" by Adorno
You made me really mad and I typed out this whole big thing explaining why that's stupid but instead I'm going to be the bigger man here and just post a derisive reaction image
It's not that the justice system is unjust, rather than the whole of legal machinery and bureaucracy is an incomprehensible, horrifying mystery to both the people who operate it and those it affects
Kafka was a lawyer, you know
Because "society" is that very same bureaucracy, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan
Everyone's fucking around and hustling trying not to die, but no one really has a clear idea of just what it is they're doing or how that actually entails their own survival.
Adorno is one of the most notable philosophers of 20'th century, his writing style is more than appropriate for his works; he actually makes it symbiotic with the content, not repeating the mistakes of enlightement even on the language level, when criticizing it. It is exactly how a 20'th century philosopher should write.
How seriously he's taken depends very much of the matter of discussion.
Adorno's bullshit commentaries about specific points in music or literature have been highly criticized, like his account of jazz music or the innovation be seen in the coral symphony.
Hardly one of the notable philosophers of the 20th century, not even in the top 20 I'd say
>Adorno's bullshit commentaries about specific points in music or literature have been highly criticized
You shouldn't criticize things you haven't read so offhandedly. One of Adorno's strengths is that he always carefully contextualizes specifics into consistent generalities. Those "specific commentaries" mean little unless you are familiar with the frameworks he constructs in Negative Dialectics, which is the best work of philosophy in the 20th century.
He totally destroys Heidegger, and does an impressive renegotiation of Kantian and Hegelian concepts.
Finally! I read this as I was working in a legal department and had the exact same interpretation, compared to even today's legal system. Great to hear that interpretation and some clarification that Kafka was a lawyer
If you take The Trial as a comment on the legal justice system or government bureocrasy then you are missing the point of Kafka as an author. He isn't concerned with human insitutions, rather with man in the face of judgement by God. The Trial is commentary on the Jewish conception of guilt, sin, judgement and his own sense of pessimism, doubt, and Otherness in his country and community.
Also the style; sparse, short sentences etc. Is a reflection of how Kafka personally felt about his relationship to the German language which he wrote it in. Jewish assimilation in Central Europe is very complicated and he felt alienated in all languages and his style in German reflects that alienation.
His entire style of prose and storytelling (not just in the trial, but all of his work) stems from the fact that he was a German Jew raised in Prague by absentee parents. He basically had no access to any sense of community or belonging for most of his life. The Trial was, indeed, inspired by a real case that Kafka worked, but to truly understand the book (and all of his books) the social commentary interpretations must necessarily take a backseat to the more general, ephemeral themes of isolation and helplessness.
>he totally destroys Heidegger
Nah m8, entirety of academia and people who generally just know what they're talking about disagree with you.
You must be a 1st year Marxist that just discovered the Frankfurt school
Well in the strictly literal sense it is about bureaucracy and meaninglessness and helplessness within it.
While I was reading The Trial, I was working as a legal assistant at the district attourneys office and was training a new colleague. His job was to send information to a citizen who was charged with a crime, and asked me if the paper that stated what the charge was should be included.
I took Kafkas book out of my backpack and put it on his desk. He got the point, we laughed, and the paper was sent.
It's about the whole human life and society as a whole and the anxiety of it all, and how to deal with yourself and your actions. How can you read the famous door part of the Trial and think that it's only about bureaucracy?